Painting by Cheri Samba

Lokuta eyaka na ascenseur, kasi vérité eyei na escalier mpe ekomi. Lies come up in the elevator; the truth takes the stairs but gets here eventually. - Koffi Olomide

Ésthetique eboma vélo. Aesthetics will kill a bicycle. - Felix Wazekwa

Monday, July 9, 2012

Guest blog: So how do we help the Congo?



This is a guest post in response to my recent blog titled "So how do we help the Congo?" It is co-authored by Pieter Vanholder, the national director of the Life and Peace Institute in the Congo, along with Deo Buuma, the executive secretary of Action pour la Paix et la Concorde (APC).

Le travail en RD Congo du Life & Peace Institute (LPI) et de ses partenaires, tels qu'Action pour la Paix et la Concorde (APC), a été assez largement commenté à l'occasion de la publication d'un Op-Ed de la politiste Séverine Autesserre paru dans le New York Times et l'International Herald Tribune datés du 22 juin – chronique ensuite discutée par Jason Stearns sur Congo Siasa. Le débat lancé par ces deux prises de parole est important. Nous souhaitons y contribuer à travers deux précisions : l'une porte sur notre diagnostic quant aux « sources » du conflit en RDC, l'autre porte plus particulièrement sur les tentatives de LPI et ses partenaires pour contourner certaines limites à notre travail mises en évidence par Jason Stearns dans sa réponse à Séverine Autesserre.

Actions locales mais diagnostic global

Premièrement, il nous paraît important de différencier le travail d'identification des « causes du conflit » et le niveau d'action choisi par les ONG de transformation de conflit. Nous pensons qu'il est possible d'« agir localement » avec les communautés des Nord et Sud-Kivu mais de « penser globalement », c'est-à-dire en ayant conscience qu'une partie du contexte socio-politique est déterminé à un niveau supérieur.

Séverine Autesserre a mis en avant les dimensions locales de l'action de LPI et APC (bien qu'il ne s'agisse pas du seul aspect de notre travail, cf. infra), en particulier l'enquête de terrain comprenant près de 800 entretiens dans 18 localités qui a permis de documenter la question des conflits fonciers et des dynamiques de cohabitation en territoire de Kalehe (le rapport issu de cette recherche-action-participative est disponible au téléchargement ici). LPI a également, avec d'autres ONG congolaises telles que le Réseau d'Innovation Organisationnelle (RIO) et Action pour le Développement et la Paix Endogène (Adepae), mené une recherche de quatre ans dans les territoires d'Uvira et Fizi, impliquant près de 600 acteurs et débouchant sur la mise en place de Cadres de Concertation Intercommunautaires et la signature d'accords entre éleveurs, agriculteurs et chefs coutumiers afin d'apaiser les tensions récurrentes entre communautés lors de la période de la transhumance (rapport disponible ici).

Une part très importante de notre travail se fait donc auprès d'éleveurs, agriculteurs, petits propriétaires terriens, paysans sans terres, femmes des zones rurales, chefs coutumiers ou encore réfugiés (en somme, le « track 3 » identifié par le théoricien John-Paul Lederach), sur des thématiques et dynamiques  principalement locales. Mais travailler auprès de ces communautés ne signifie pas que nos organisations situent les causes profondes des conflits en RDC dans les seuls conflits fonciers ou de pouvoir coutumier.

Pour preuve, cette courte analyse de contexte extraite d'une communication présentée début avril dernier par LPI lors d'un panel à l'International Studies Association Annual Convention (version non définitive). La question foncière y est identifiée comme un facteur structurel parmi d'autres :

« The main structural factor explaining the Congolese conflict is the generalised system of political patronage that the DRC has inherited from the pre-colonial period, which was exacerbated during the colonial period and is still reinforced with the lack of democratic process since the independence period. (…)
       With this specific organisation of political power in DRC comes a series of other structural factors, such as the ethnic aspect of competitive politics, which empties much of the democratic process of any real debate or exchange of ideas in favour of simply promoting members of its own community. The manipulation of ethnicity is thus one of the more efficient strategies for attainment and maintenance of power in the DRC. Ethnic solidarity is expressed usually in a negative way, so that rather than creating a basis for social cohesion expressing openness and tolerance, it tends to invade all spheres of society, including the financial and cultural, in an exclusive manner.
       Another structural factor, linked to the above elements, concerns the problem of land across the country and more precisely the duality, if not opposition, between the modern official legal system and its traditional, but often un-official, counterpart. This duality in standards of land management has created a situation of uncertainty and insecurity in relation to land tenure, which is further exacerbated by the weakness of administrative and judicial institutions. (…)
       A final structural factor that mainly arises from the legacy of the above-described system of governance is the general deterioration of the national and regional political system since the 1960’s. This deterioration is primarily characterised by violent and reoccurring ethnically defined conflicts in the Great Lakes region, and the presence of rebellions in Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi and the DRC with secessionist tendencies, political assassinations and coups.
       Next to these structural factors, several secondary causes to the conflict can be identified, such as the presence of a multitude of national and international armed groups, the enormous mineral wealth in DRC, a series of unsuccessful military attempts to solve the conflict, the presence of a large amount of counteracting forces and an overall mentality of impunity. All this must be seen in a context where there is a very weak state, unable to react to any of the challenges cited above. »

LPI et APC ont donc effectivement choisi les communautés comme un des « points d'entrée » possible dans le processus de transformation des conflits de l'Est du Congo : en misant sur les acteurs de la société civile congolaise, nous espérons atteindre également, sous certaines conditions, une partie plus large de la société. Mais cela ne signifie pas que nous estimons que les ressorts de ces conflits soient uniquement locaux.

La deuxième précision que nous souhaitions apporter concerne la place de ces actions locales dans le travail de LPI. L'accent mis par S. Autesserre et J. Stearns sur le caractère très local de l'approche développée par LPI et APC (résumé sous l'étiquette « local reconciliation work ») ne doit pas occulter une autre partie substantielle de notre travail, qui vise les acteurs nationaux et internationaux.

Au-delà de l'approche communautaire

Recherche après recherche, LPI constate que les questions traitées dans les cadres de dialogue et de concertation soutenus par l'Institut ont des ressorts sous-régionaux. Pour ne citer que deux exemples : la question de la transhumance bovine à Fizi et Uvira, citée en exemple par S. Autesserre, ne saurait être comprise sans se pencher sur les politiques de modernisation de l'élevage menées au Rwanda et Burundi. Quant aux questions foncières, elles sont souvent étroitement liées à la question du retour des réfugiés depuis le Rwanda, le Burundi ou la Tanzanie. Plus généralement, on ne saurait ignorer les effets de politiques pilotées depuis Kinshasa ou certains pays étrangers sur le contexte de l'Est.

C'est notamment pour cette raison que LPI, dans son travail d'accompagnement technique et financier, encourage ses partenaires à identifier et travailler avec les « acteurs délocalisés » dans toutes leurs recherches : politiciens, militaires, réfugiés, opérateurs économiques, membres de la société civile, députés ou encore déplacés de guerre ne vivant pas à l'Est mais identifiés comme influents. Ainsi, dans le cas de la recherche sur Kalehe mentionnée ci-dessus, APC a interviewé 75 acteurs délocalisés à Bukavu, Goma et Kinshasa, en plus des réfugiés de Kalehe vivant au Rwanda. Parmi les interviewés figuraient nombre de responsables politiques, députés et officiers militaires. Autre exemple : dès 2007, pour ses recherches sur les problématiques de Fizi et Uvira, quatorze enquêteurs issus des ONG partenaire de LPI se sont rendus à Kinshasa, Kigali et Bujumbura ainsi que les camps des réfugiés tanzaniens de Lugufu et Nyarugusu pour des entretiens (en plus de ceux menés auprès des commandants militaires, chefs de cités, chefs des postes d’encadrement administratif et administrateurs des territoires).

Nous pensons que ce travail peut encore être rendu plus efficace s'il se double d'une stratégie efficace de plaidoyer à destination de ces acteurs nationaux et internationaux. C'est la raison pour laquelle LPI compte ouvrir avant la fin 2012 une antenne à Kinshasa. À travers elle, nous espérons un rapprochement avec les institutions étatiques congolaises ainsi qu'avec certaines institutions sous-régionales.

Reste la question des groupes armés. J. Stearns souligne à juste titre comment l'approche de transformation de conflit « par la base » est limitée au fur et à mesure que les groupes armés s'autonomisent des revendications de leurs milieux d'appartenance, si besoin, en s'insérant dans des réseaux économiques et politiques transnationaux – à noter que cette autonomisation reste souvent relative, car la plupart des « leaders » de ces groupes armés savent continuer à instrumentaliser la question identitaire pour légitimer leurs prises de position. La première nécessité pour les organisations de transformation de conflits est effectivement de comprendre les dynamiques internes de chacun de ces groupes, et la nature de leurs liens avec « la base » ; c'est la meilleure stratégie pour comprendre comment les atteindre, dans le souci d'inclure certains au processus de concertation intercommunautaire.

LPI a débuté ce travail dès 2003 avec la publication d'un travail de recherche d'Hélène Morvan sur la cohabitation des populations civiles avec les combattants maï-mai dans la région de Bunyakiri (rapport disponible au téléchargement ici). La démarche a été poursuivie en 2007-2008 à travers la recherche-action-participative menée par LPI et l'ONG UPDI sur le groupe armé Rasta, alors actif  dans les zones de Nindja et Kaniola (Sud-Kivu) (rapport disponible ici).

La recherche sur Fizi et Uvira se focalisait également en grande partie sur le phénomène des groupes armés – d'où le titre de l'ouvrage auquel elle a donné lieu : "Au-delà des groupes armés : conflits locaux et connexions sous-régionales. L'exemple de Fizi et Uvira (Sud-Kivu)". Elle a conduit les chercheurs de LPI et ses partenaires dans la zone sous contrôle des Forces Républicaines Fédéralistes (FRF), dont les leaders ont été rencontrés à Kamombo et à Mikenge puis inclus lors des phases de restitutions des conclusions de l'enquête aux populations. Les leaders maï-maï Yakutumba et Zabuloni ont également été interviewés plusieurs fois et ont participé aux restitutions et aux rencontres intracommunautaires, en plus de simples miliciens actifs ou des ex-combattants reconvertis à la vie civile.

Acteurs politiques nationaux et internationaux, leaders de groupes armés : on le voit, même si LPI et ses partenaires, dont APC, ne prétendent pas maîtriser parfaitement les complexes jeux et enjeux politiques, économiques et militaires à l'échelle de la sous-région, notre travail n'entend pas se réduire au dialogue intercommunautaire à l'échelle locale.

En somme, nous pensons que comprendre les dynamiques locales de violences ne doit pas conduire à ignorer qu'une partie du décor est planté par d'autres – un « cadre imposé » par un certain nombre de politiciens, diplomates, législateurs, businessmen. Mais nous pensons également qu'à l'inverse, examiner le cadre posé par la législation nationale et par les tractations diplomatico-militaires internationales ne doit pas faire oublier qu'au Congo comme ailleurs, les simples citoyens composent avec leur environnement, contournent ou adaptent les règles, se révoltent ou se soumettent, s'affrontent ou s'allient, pour une variété de raisons qui a souvent peu à voir avec les discussions de ministères ou d’organisations internationales, et qu'il convient plus que jamais d'explorer.


23 comments:

Veronica said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Veronica said...

Hi Jason, can you please email me about a blog idea I've been considering? Many thanks!

John said...

Is it possible to translate this to English? I'm very interested in the post but unfortunately don't read French and the free translation tools do a poor job. I suspect many other interested readers are in the same boat and would benefit from a good translation. Thanks for your consideration.

Zlot said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Zlot said...

Merci pour cette contribution importante. Ca precise la reponse de Jason et met en perspective l'article de S. autesserre. Merci pour cet effort.
Charlotte

Anonymous said...

@ john
If u click on the different links the author is providing, u will be direct to the english version of the blogger's ideas.
blaise

Anonymous said...

Rwanda Defense Forces (RDF)march on Kinshasa has begun:
http://www.afroamerica.net/AfricaGL/2012/07/08/drc-rwandan-defense-forces-march-on-kinshasa-has-begun/#more-1841

Anand said...

Thanks for posting this interesting response. Basically, the LPI and APC have a very measured take on DRC conflict. I am glad they highlighted the impact of international manipulation on DRC politics both national and local. I think this point is often over looked in the debate of conflict minerals vs. land issues etc. The policies of Western Donors and surrounding countries have a huge impact on DRC political realities. The duality of Western action in the DRC still baffles me. I further appreciate the discussion of the need to approach people at a local level in dealing with issues, while maintaining an international approach. This is one of the best comprehensive analyses I have read in a while. Thanks for posting.

Liz said...

I enjoyed this balanced take on the effects of local, regional, and international action on the east of the DRC. While I agree that it will take a balanced approach to bring the conflict in the Kivus to an end, too often the local conflicts are overlooked or considered unimportant, putting the main focus on the international/national level, ignoring entirely the complex and fluid relationships between groups in the Kivus. I am happy to see these organizations are taking on both aspects of the conflict, but I don't think that there is any harm in speaking out about the local aspects of the violence in the Kivus, because until the many mai mai militias and local communities are brought to negotiate peace, citizenship rights, and land rights, I think we will continue to see movements like M23 roil the east with turmoil.

Rich said...

Thanks Anand -

I second your comment on this thread.

Indeed this is a very comprehensive piece of analysis.

I do like the fact that it highlights the interaction between acting at local level whilst thinking at global level. However, the problem the problem I have is to understand the direction of such interaction. Is it better to think global first then act local or the other way round? I say this because the two levels may act independently from one another hence complicating the whole process.

Rich

Anand said...

Hello, Rich. Good to hear from you brother. That's a very good question you have asked. I certainly can't claim to answer with any certainty, but my initial temptation is to say that both are equally important tasks, and a simultaneous approach is needed. Any work at the international level, that doesn't include local populations, is doomed from the outset. This is the classic mistake that even well meaning "elites" tend to make. The term "elites" has very little meaning for me by the way. Additionally, social movements must have local buy-in to be successful. But local solutions alone won't solve international issues either. Forgive the bad sports analogy but it makes sense to me here: In basketball, the player with the ball must deal with the immediate defender in front of him. But he must also be aware of the larger picture of the court, his teammates, and other defenders. There are always two games going on simultaneously; the game with the defender and the larger game happening on the rest of the court. Both have to be handled at the same time for a successful outcome. To take it a step further, unity is the absolute key for success. I think this applies to the DRC as well. Now what kind of movement can encompass both fronts successfully is another question.

Anand said...

Liz - I agree that local dynamics must not be overlooked, and they often are. I think the problem I often face is that the arguments between advocacy folks tend to be very dogmatic. I don't think the discussion should focus on land issues at the expense of resources and international dynamics, nor vice versa. Any argument that blankets another legitimate concern is not viable. I find that often people will push an under-represented view point at the expense of another important view. We have to find a way to add elements to the conversation without blocking out other legitimate factors. Basically, I find that we yell at each other too much and try to WIN debates rather than LEARNING from them. And I can guarantee that folks in the Kivus and the country at large don't give two shits about advocacy folks debating the exact proportionate effect of conflict minerals vs. land right issues. That is why I like the holistic view presented in the post. The DRC has holistic problems, which require holistic analysis and soultions. That's my take anyway.

Anonymous said...

All this discussion is so difficult to follow for me, that looks so académic and academic for social science people, please no offence to social scientist.

I am a scientific a physicist and in physics there is a principle that says the best theory from many is the simplest.

So this is my theory: there are 2 levels in this conflict the regional and the local. And it is the regional level that influences the local. So if you want sustainable solution solve the regional if you want to assuage population pain for short period of time act local. Why?

Even if you help local population make local communities work together it just suffice that regional power to unbalance the harmony for the situation to worsen again.

So let's look at the regional conflict, and let's try to understand its internal dynamic. For me this conflic is similar to the balkan conflict between Serbs, croats and Muslims. Serbs were fighting everybody, croate and Muslims made circumstiancial alliances against Serbs and in most of others places they fought each other.
The great lines Of the conflict were pure racism, I want my race (my tribe, nation or ethnic group) to dominate. There was no rational whatsoever, after scratching the surface one realize that people fight for their live and because they have been told that the other want to kill him. And people spreading this rumor and manipulating massess are just racist, period.

For the Serbs because I am strong, I can take on everyone. For the others, local realities allowed counter nature alliances, but these alliances do not change the regional dynamics and sooner or later local alliances will fall and local group will allign with regional block from which they receive their support.

In drc at regional level you have the tutsies (kagame, m23,cndp,etc..), you have the hutu (the fdlr) and the congolese (May May, from the yakotumba to gedeon, passing by rai...). The tutsi is the Serb, the may may are the croate and the hutu are the Muslims. My comparaison is power wise because there is also the number aspect, in ex Yugoslavia each group was more or less a third of the total. In kivu tutsi are like 10% of overall population. Thanks to USA, UK and money they loot in Kivu they have been able to build a trong military power and this power is directed to push tutsi domination and interest at the regional level. All the others group are just not able to organize themsleves to the same extent. They cannot defend their interest as succsfully as the tutsies.

Now the international level just benefit from the situation, multinational don't care who sell to them. If you have a good price, I will buy. Same thing like diamond or gold. there is no morality in business just interest. That applies also to international politics, there is no moral just interest. Rwanda guarantees that our interest are respected and we will support them. If the other show that our interest will be respected then we will create a situation where we support everybody ( Israel and saoudi Arabia are both biig USA support and benefit from its prtection).

So if you want to solve bring Rwanda to include hutu and manage a constitution that manages their positio like it. Was done in Burundi. But tutsi from kagame have no incentive to give up power or share it. They are very happy with current situation. And I you criticize you become "allier du genocide".

Once you reconcile people in Rwanda, tutsi in drc will be obliged to go the rweconciliation route as they will know that tikenof domination is over. The condition for that to be a huge kumbaya is that drc build a strong states that makes everybody feel safe. Mobutu did that and it is his biggest legacy.

That is my theory. What do you think of it ?

Max Plank

Anonymous said...

@ Max Plank

Thanx a billion Sir for your analysis. I like you more because your pseudonym Max Planck and niels bohr were my quantum theory heroes as a maths student in my univ. years. Lol. But seriously you put the finger on it, in science one is trained to always abstract and model situations and provide solutions that accommodate(address) their constituents and relations.

I just hope that those who should end this unjustifiable 15-year Congolese tragedy (USA and UN) will read your analysis, which only explains better what some of us on this blog try so hard to put across. Which is that the violence in the Kivus is unnecessary and Kagame-made; with a bit of humanity its resolution is simple:

(1) Sincere reconciliation between Tutsis and Hutus in Rwanda is unavoidable. All prominent Tutsis and Hutus are calling for it except extremist kagamist zealous.
(2) Integration of Tutsis into Congolese society, not by the barrel of the gun or elite “fantasy ambitions” but through real intercommunity trust and cohabitation, is non negotiable.
(3) The building of a strong and democratic Congolese state is imperative, absolutely. But how is that possible if Kagame keeps hassling?

muanacongo

Anonymous said...

So we needed a Physicist to make all this complicated situation clearer, and realize that behind all of this madness there is just plain, old racism and ethnic prejudice !!!!!

Hats off Max Planck

Anonymous said...

I am going to give my perspective as a wanabe movie producer and martial artist.

It is true we need 2 simultaneous approach:

* Think Global and act local
* Think local and act global

The issue on ethnicity is very true and the best solution is to push the development so that people will eventually stop looking at each other as Black or White, Hutu or Tusti, Luba or Katangais, Nande, Rega, mushi, etc...

Today in the US, people don't look black and white as much they used to, because now people look at the GREEN papers in their pocket or at their bank accounts in US, Swiss, Cayman Islands, etc... and it does not matter who is their partner. If your bring a proposal that will make their pocket deeper they will go for it.
For the US to reach this level, it took some heavy work, but the dividends are paying off now.

One of the key decision that paved the way for the US to be a place where people can have "the American Dream" was President Einsehower vision of taking all the young soldiers who did the Kumite in WW2 and gave them a new KUMITE: Building the InterState Infrastructure of the US. A great championship that made many of those Soldiers happy and proud of building the backbone of this great nation.

Movie Industry Analogy:

The Movie Industry has 3 key groups of People:

* Movie Producers
* Movie Actors
* Movie watchers

So here, to really get what's going on, you need to know who are the Movie producers, the Actors playing the movie for the producers and the ones who are going to watch the movie. In this case, this is becoming a Horror movie that I am not liking at all.

Since at this time, I am just wathcing the movie what I am doing is to complain about the movie and trying to make movie actors understand that - hey you are acting in this horror movie, but the people reaping the benefits are the movie producers. True you are getting paid for acting in the movie, but it is an horror movie and people are not liking it. When eventually as an actor you decide to become a producer, which most producers don't like actors who want to become like them, they will give you a hard time and push you down so you stay a movie actor. LN has understood this, the hard way and has refused this time to be the Lead actor, but instead a Director. SM has taken the Lead Acting role, but again, he is just an actor, behind the scenes the producer will call all the shots, but mainly the producers will follow what the "EXECUTIVE" Producers will say, because after all, it is their green papers that is financing the movie.

The solution here is to tell the Executives to stop financing HORROR movies and instead finance the building of movie Theaters (Infrastructure), once we have good movie theaters. There will be an outlet for everybody to do all kind of stuff and hence create: "The African Dream".

Will the Executive Producers do so? Not sure.

It is up to us Africans to create our "African dream". It is up to us African Actors and Movie watchers to build those movie thearters and other Media Infrastructure so everybody gets a job and moves forward with their lives.

Anonymous said...

Here also all the Lead Actors, Directors need to learn that as you take on a Horror movie Job, you are also taking on the risk of building a bad reputation for yourself, because once the movie is done and you have succeeded and ready to move to the next level and become may be a producer and wants to produce Comedy movies, movie watchers may not embraces you because they have gotten a bad test of you with previous horror movies. You will need to work hard to prove that you just took on a job.

Keep in mind also that Executive Producers may not work directly with you, because they already have established good relationship with their own producers’ buddies and you will try to become an "independent movie producer" which will be tough, but it is doable. Make plans to master to really act local and think global vice-versa. Mainly train your local people to eventually run your independent movie studio. But also never forget that as you build your studio, you need to keep good relationship with other Movie producers and please keep UNITY in your studio. Changes are that other movie producers will see your growth and will see it as a threat and will weaken you by creating division within your studio.

UNITED, Africa will stand!

Anonymous said...

Martial Art Analogy:

The whole world is grieving because of this Art of War. We are recruiting members left and right and fill them in our dojo, train them and eventually we need to get them some KUMITE. (In US he is actually interesting to see that you can't drink alcohol at 18, but they will love for you to join their dojo). So what is happening is that people are organizing Championships everywhere (Tunisia, Egypt, Sudan, Libya, DRC, Syira, Iraq, Afg, etc...) The championships are not just launched randomly, of course there is a reason behind and mainly is to divide areas where there are some UNITY and momentum of growth, or when the Master Dojo hears about some Bigger Dojos making a better move than them.

In this Martial Art Analogy, I would like to point that what has been happening is that many master has trained their students so well and eventually the students become a threat, so the big master sends him away to launch a new dojo, they keep a good relationship, but the master is not too happy since he has lost control of his student. So what happens: either the master tries to teach the student a lesson, it may work, LN got his lesson and went on his knee. But YM had a hard time to teach PK a lesson. PK instead showed him that He is probably a black belt with more levels up now, than him and His best student did that job in Kisangani. We should also point out here that all the YM students who went to launch their dojo in RW have done well and they build themselves up and are now running their shows on TV. I don't think they have reached the level of Theatrical release yet. Probably working on doing so.
They are now building movie theaters first (Infrastructure), which is what all African Black Belts need to do, and eventually all the movie watchers will be happy to watch a movie in a nice theater. I will say all the Black Belts in East Africa have understood that and they working on that and that is why the bigger dojos are very much interested in East Africa. The good thing also is that the Black Belts in East Africa are working towards UNITY. Now we should not forget that some YM students got jealous and not too happy with PK as he became the Jet Li. I mostly give credit to Jet Li because he also understood that after training all this Martial Artist, he needed to give them some championships. The championship that came in was Darfur and with some good pay. So that was a good relieve for him. Because with those entire unoccupied martial artist, very easy to get an ambitious students or a fellow colleague to organize them and turn their back to their master. As a master you need to know how to keep your dojo in order. He is doing it very well and it makes sense, He was trained by the best dojo and since He knows there is no success without successor. He has sent his own son to train at the Best dojo of the world - WP, may be not to join a championship but to give him a good perspective of the whole world.

Anonymous said...

Unity and Aikido for Africa

Now, JK is an intriguing student. Very quiet and reserved. Learn this from his Master JK-1 probably. JK has a much bigger task in hands because the DRC dojo is way too big and it is not easy to keep it in order. But mind you, JK is not as stupid as many think. A quiet and reserved person is usually a person that many fear, because they are not sure of what is planning and that's why PK was not too sure of SM, but LN said that he will keep him on check. It is very hard to keep on check a martial artist. You have trained him a dangerous art, unless you have also trained him some good behavior, chances are that they can go rogue at anytime. BN went very wild and it was not easy to control him. I am not sure if JK is now a prodigal son or he is the Student who got his black belt and feels like he can take on his master.

I will end by saying this: We are tired of KUMITEs. EXECUTIVE Producers, let work on building movie theaters (Infrastructure) first. With Good movie theaters, you will do all your businesses better and the population also will have a better life.

Dojo Masters, Martial Artists, I will strongly recommend that we move from the martial art of KUMITE, but instead let learn AIKIDO (NO KUMITE!)The art of betterment, and let take our ambition in Entrepreneurship and the rebuilding of Africa.

Black Belts of Africa let plan for Unity and fight division. After winning a Kumite make plans to channel the energy of your martial artist in Building the Much Needed Infrastructure of Africa. The Kumites have taken enough lives. Let rethink our strategies here.

UNITY, PEACE, Great Future for Africa.

Jo Tyabji said...

Dear Jason Stearns,

I am looking for writers - Congolese or otherwise - to give strong analysis of the M23 and Rwanda, the likelihood of escalation and the existence of other paths, for openSecurity http://www.opendemocracy.net/opensecurity

Would you be able to recommend anyone? Contact me at jo.tyabji@opendemocracy.net

Best wishes,
Jo

Anonymous said...

Another insight: http://ciafrica.wordpress.com/2012/07/13/the-m23-return-to-the-future-and-possible-solutions/

H.

Anonymous said...

@Max

That was, perhaps, the most illuminating analysis of a commentor I have heard yet in my 3 years of visiting this blog.

I too feel that at times our threads grow a little too academic for my tastes given, well, the situation at hand.

Please continue to comment here when you are able. This "dogmatic" American advocate appreciates it.

Mel

KYLIE DAVIES said...

This is really fascinating material! I personally have completely cherished reading your own points and have arrived at the conclusion that you are correct with regards to a lot of them. You actually are great.
Home and Family

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.